Parsons Brinckerhoff says it will be releasing the definitive "Alternatives Analysis" this November. The City Council will then decide in December whether to choose rail transit or HOT lanes as the "Locally Preferred Alternative."

Up to that time, it will feed us dribs and drabs about the features of the system, but little about the benefits, which is to say, reductions in traffic congestion — if any.

PB did say last week that by the time the expenses are all in, total costs for a rail line would be north of $4 billion. The mayor said originally that the project would cost $2.5 billion and that he would need a one percent increase in the general excise tax to fund its construction. He had to settle for half of one percent.

So it begs the question, if a $2.5 billon rail line needed a one percent tax increase, what does a $4 billion system need — even before cost overruns?

And what can we expect from the Alternatives Analysis?

We must remember that PB is a self-described "client-focused" company.

The client in the case of the Alternatives Analysis is not us, the people of the City and County of Honolulu. The client is Mayor Mufi Hannemann. And as is normal when elected officials are smitten with a vision, PB will make the best case for whatever the mayor wants. Since PB has nearly $10 million with which to do it, one assumes it will turn out very thorough documentation that will be quite plausible — on its face.

PB has to make its case for rail transit with the lowest credible construction costs and operating losses, together with the highest possible ridership projections. It will need these to justify its claim for a cost-effective lessening of traffic congestion by rail.

Similarly, since the mayor wants rail, PB will have to show very high costs and little usage for the High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes alternative.

It is driving up HOT lanes' costs by, for example, including very expensive elevated bus stops on the HOT lanes. These stops must comply with the Americans with Disability Act (ADA), which means escalators, elevators, and stairs for each one. And they will have to be very long to have buses entering at 60 mph, stopping and then accelerating back up to 60 mph again.

No matter that no other HOT lanes project anywhere else has bus stops. It makes as much sense as putting express bus stops on our freeways.

There are limits to what PB can justify in their projections. Here are some of its other problems: